Do you think I could just leave this part blank and it'd be okay? We're just going to replace the whole thing with a header image anyway, right?
You are not logged in.
I have great difficulty understanding what you're actually trying to say. It all just seems to be a collection of thoughts that are either irrelevant, made up entirely, or just so far from making sense that I can't find any meaning in them.
Seriously, are you sure you want to side with logic?
Pretty sure. Seems very reasonable to me.
If you believe that there can't possibly be anything good left for you in a few years
I didn't say this.
A religious person would argue that religion frees him.
Free from critical thought, perhaps.
You obviously don't live in the United States. Or most other countries.
Quite right. I was just using myself as an example.
Apparently you didn't read his argument. Mankind is selfish by nature. If your actions won't impact you in the long term, then what would stop you from doing whatever you want, or whatever will ensure your happiness? Sometimes, your happiness costs that of others, but why would that stop you? You dodged his point.
What?
We're all too stubborn to be convinced of another possible view
I'm well aware of other view points. I'm also aware that some of them are illogical and the like.
Lets get this back on topic, death can be discussed at the new topic below.
Reason number one: Considering an entire religion dedicated to spiritual enlightenment has been built off the Four Noble Truths, I wouldn't be so fast to shoot it down (Buddhism). And if you want to shoot down the entire Buddhist religion, plan to talk for a long time on a different topic.
Really, Tako? I doubt you honestly think I was trying to take down Buddhism as a whole; you're not that stupid. We were talking about your own, personal attachment to your life. I highly doubt that you're Buddhist, and, therefore, Buddhism is completely unrelated to this part of the debate.
If you're not attached to your life, then you don't care about your life. If you don't care about your life, then you wouldn't mind ending it. Frankly, I don't even remember how this relates to the argument as a whole, anyway.
But like I said earlier, death is a personal feeling and has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of religious teachings.
... You and Bass honestly don't think death is related to religion? That's strange, seeing as how every religion has its own view on death.
Pretty sure. Seems very reasonable to me.
Since you took this out of context, I'm not sure how this fits into the argument. All I can say is that illogical thought could seem logical to an illogical mind.
I didn't say this.
Yes you did, unless you think decomposing will be fun. I'll admit that you'll probably last a bit more than a few years, but it's certainly possible for you to die tomorrow, and so it was reasonable to say "in few years."
Free from critical thought, perhaps.
Why can't you get it through your thick skull that this argument is two sided? A religious person can offer an equally reasonable counter argument against science.
Quite right. I was just using myself as an example.
What a coincidence, so did I! In fact, I imagine you have some crime wherever you live, too, right?
What?
I can't believe I'm using this word, but I'm baffled by yours and Tako's seeming lack of knowledge. You both seem educated, yet there are times when I can't be sure.
Let's take this slowly. You have to admit that mankind is selfish by nature. Therefore, if a man found a way to advance his life at no cost to himself, then he would take it. If the way cost somebody else, whether physically or mentally, he would still usually take it. Because of this, it's necessary for there to be laws, both official and implicit. The law may stop people from killing you, but what's to stop them from verbally abusing you? Politeness, aka morals.
This was krubby's point, anyway. I won't argue it any further.
I'm well aware of other view points. I'm also aware that some of them are illogical and the like.
Rofl I'm sorry, but you're just admitting that you're too stubborn to even consider another view. Is this even an argument anymore?
Okay, I'm done. Again, everyone is too stubborn to be convinced of another possible view. There's no point in arguing this any further; all we're accomplishing is wasting time and procrastinating homework. I'm with this argument; bring on the next!
Yes you did, unless you think decomposing will be fun. I'll admit that you'll probably last a bit more than a few years, but it's certainly possible for you to die tomorrow, and so it was reasonable to say "in few years."
Given that my life expectancy is longer than a few years, it probably wasn't. If you meant after my death, then you should've said so. Even if we change that matter, the answer is still the same in that I never said that. It's most certainly possible that there's more after death, it's just improbable. Even if it were a fact that this life is all there is, I fail to see why that would make it a sad one.
You have to admit that mankind is selfish by nature.
Doubtful.
Therefore, if a man found a way to advance his life at no cost to himself, then he would take it.
No.
If the way cost somebody else, whether physically or mentally, he would still usually take it.
Doubtful.
Rofl I'm sorry, but you're just admitting that you're too stubborn to even consider another view.
No.
Again, everyone is too stubborn to be convinced of another possible view.
No.
-.- I think we're done here.
On a completely-unrelated-to-the-above-conversation-yet-still-semi-related-to-the-OP note, I had a thought in Algebra II today.
If someone were to be alienated from both religion and evolution for the first eighteen years of life, then was sat down with the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran, Dianetics, the vedas, and Origin of Species, they would all seem pretty unbelievable at first. But only one doesn't involve an invisible overlord. One makes sense. One has proof behind it.
Offline
Origin of spceise maks sence. its just animal beter. animal have kids that aer better. kids beat al others so that onyl beter ones are left.
Offline
On a completely-unrelated-to-the-above-conversation-yet-still-semi-related-to-the-OP note, I had a thought in Algebra II today.
If someone were to be alienated from both religion and evolution for the first eighteen years of life, then was sat down with the Bible, the Torah, the Qu'ran, Dianetics, the vedas, and Origin of Species, they would all seem pretty unbelievable at first. But only one doesn't involve an invisible overlord. One makes sense. One has proof behind it.
Why are alienated opinions superior to opinions formed from observations?
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Offline
Why are alienated opinions superior to opinions formed from observations?
I imagine he was trying to say that science is reproducible if all were lost. That is because it's based upon logically thinking about observations and such.
Religions, however, are not reproducible because they're made up.
It mainly just provides some validity to science making sense and being right, and religion not.
TheGreenTroll wrote:I believe in Jesus Christ and I believe in the Holy Spirit. I do not follow the Bible literally, since it was brought together by men some hundred of years later, but I do believe in the story of Jesus Christ, that he died on the cross etc.
What makes you believe in the Jesus parts if others can be dismissed? Do you just like the message he's meant to have stood for? Do you think it's reasonable / logical for an almighty creator to do such a thing? Did Jesus die for our sins or perform miracles?
Don't feel as if you need answer all or any of those questions, I'm just curious now.
As far as I know, the stories about Jesus Christ and that person, was real and written during the lifetime of Jesus Christs. Many other parts of the Bible was composed by random religious people some hundred years later.
Guys, you apparently have no idea of not only how useless this entire topic is, but how it causes terrible feuds between two sides that aren't being convinced either way. There's the side that argues no god, there's the side that argues god, and there's the side that argues that we can't prove anything to each other because in believing in one, you don't believe in the other, and it cant be proven to each of us one way or the other. Did I mention we're not proving anything to each other?
TGT, why so troll.
Let this die, please.
^Please don't tell them that, it is way more fun to read arguments like that.
Offline
^Please don't tell them that, it is way more fun to read arguments like that.
I don't like it, I don't like seeing people pointlessly destroy any signs of a good relationship.
Last edited by xputnameherex (Feb 24 2012 3:11:43 pm)
Twipply wrote:TheGreenTroll wrote:I believe in Jesus Christ and I believe in the Holy Spirit. I do not follow the Bible literally, since it was brought together by men some hundred of years later, but I do believe in the story of Jesus Christ, that he died on the cross etc.
What makes you believe in the Jesus parts if others can be dismissed? Do you just like the message he's meant to have stood for? Do you think it's reasonable / logical for an almighty creator to do such a thing? Did Jesus die for our sins or perform miracles?
Don't feel as if you need answer all or any of those questions, I'm just curious now.
As far as I know, the stories about Jesus Christ and that person, was real and written during the lifetime of Jesus Christs. Many other parts of the Bible was composed by random religious people some hundred years later.
Yes, the Bible has always been a curious book. I respect those who understand that the Bible isn't necessarily a perfect replica of the dead-sea scrolls.
However the Bible was made, is it really this supreme book of all moral knowledge and authority? I personally believe in the phrase "You are the change you want to see in the world", and in extension you yourself guide the path of humanity; giving utmost importance to what we deem morally correct.
World leaders who have claimed to be religious are certainly putting forward a foot that says otherwise, like America for example. I'm not sure how much of a Bible-fanatic Obama is, but if it fails him now, when will it do us good? I have yet to see the Bible single-handedly influence a nation to do great good in this world - ironic given its initiatives.
But perhaps my range isn't lateral enough. If someone could enlighten me on the effects of the Bible to the world that would be grand. In particular, its effects on one nation and how that nation interacts with its neighbors.
---
Ratburntro44 wrote:^Please don't tell them that, it is way more fun to read arguments like that.
I don't like it, I don't like seeing people pointlessly destroy any signs of a good relationship.
Honestly, I take more disturbance in discussing the act of discussing than discussing religion's accuracy and future. Once you examine the thread's structure in detail, you will understand it's not simply "HERR DERR GOD IS REAL" followed by "HERR DERR GOD IS FAKE" over and over.
In any event you are not forced to read or participate in anything. While I do honor your initiative to prevent future conflicts and miscommunication, there will always be the philosophical bunch on the forum that will debate anything at whim, so for now it's best to just let it be.
If at any point people begin to flame or get out-of-hand, I would be more than happy to lock.
Yeah, well, you know that's just like, uh, your opinion, man.
Offline
@Takoman02: While the Bible has certainly never given an inauguration speech or declared peace by itself, it has indirectly. The Bible teaches moral standards. Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
And I know this thread is not people just saying "HERR DERR..." and "___" but that doesn't mean that it is not pointless.
Last edited by xputnameherex (Feb 24 2012 4:22:25 pm)
Let this die, please.
I'm fine.
Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
LOL
written during the lifetime of Jesus Christs. Many other parts of the Bible was composed by random religious people some hundred years later.
Based on a fairly unsourced website, it does seem that what's left of the New Testament was written in a fairly small time period, from about 50 to 150 CE.
This other link seems to think jesus was born around 6 BCE and died around 30 CE.
That's a minimum of a 20 year gap. Assuming those dates are accurate, does it change anything?
Last edited by Twipply (Feb 24 2012 4:43:20 pm)
xputnamehere wrote:Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent and deceitful place.
LOL
What? You don't believe me? Are you saying that the Bible doesn't teach morality as its highest standard? The entire concept of getting into heaven can only be accomplished by performing good deeds, and not bad ones. Millions, and yes, even billions of people either make decisions regularly based on it, or at least at one point in there life have.
Before you say that terrorists use the Koran as guidance for their terrorizing, that is because they misinterpret the Koran, horribly. It is also a form of a gang, a sense of belonging when nothing else in life is working for them. Ask any Muslim you find and they will say that hate Jihadists just as much as you do.
EDIT: btw, I'm not saying that the world would be a place with no good, just one with a significant amount of less good and more evil. I think that SquadFS would be a good example of that:
I am a Christian but it matters not whether there is a God or not.
It's about the teachings, the bible may be proven it's a story - yet I will not care, that we should care for one another, that we treat others as we would want to be treated. All religions have the same bones just slightly different muscles.
Last edited by xputnameherex (Feb 24 2012 5:30:23 pm)
@Takoman02: While the Bible has certainly never given an inauguration speech or declared peace by itself, it has indirectly. The Bible teaches moral standards. Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
And I know this thread is not people just saying "HERR DERR..." and "___" but that doesn't mean that it is not pointless.
I think moral taught by bible is good. Without it would be really messy.
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15)
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19)
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man she must be quiet. (Timothy 2:12)
and many many more
please tell me again about those moral standards and bible? What is the link there? I dont see any.
Would you kill me if I dont believe in god? Why?
Last edited by WELL_ (Feb 24 2012 5:38:23 pm)
xputnameherex wrote:@Takoman02: While the Bible has certainly never given an inauguration speech or declared peace by itself, it has indirectly. The Bible teaches moral standards. Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
And I know this thread is not people just saying "HERR DERR..." and "___" but that doesn't mean that it is not pointless.
I think moral taught by bible is good. Without it would be really messy.
Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15)
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19)
I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet. (Timothy 2:12)
and many many moreplease tell me again about those moral standarss and bible? What is the link there? I dont see any.
Killing someone = Hell (death) Wrong with that? Of course, there is always forgiveness.
Always forgiveness. I also don't see many sacrifices nowadays. That is also dated, Christianity accepts people from other religions.
Timothy said that, not God. Silence could also be mistranslated.
THe Bible is my link.
Do you believe in everything what is written in bible?
Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
That's the entire point I've been trying to make the entire time despite being atheist.
World leaders who have claimed to be religious are certainly putting forward a foot that says otherwise, like America for example. I'm not sure how much of a Bible-fanatic Obama is, but if it fails him now, when will it do us good?
DUMPASS! EVERYONE KNOWS THAT OBAMA IS MUSLIM AND WANTS TO DESTROY AMERICA AND WASN'T BORN IN AMERICA AND IS RELATED TO SADDAM HUSSEIN! IT'S RIDICULOUS TO THINK ANYTHING ELSE!
Offline
Yes, the Bible has always been a curious book. I respect those who understand that the Bible isn't necessarily a perfect replica of the dead-sea scrolls.
Damn nubs. They have no idea how corrupt religions became.
World leaders who have claimed to be religious are certainly putting forward a foot that says otherwise, like America for example. I'm not sure how much of a Bible-fanatic Obama is, but if it fails him now, when will it do us good? I have yet to see the Bible single-handedly influence a nation to do great good in this world - ironic given its initiatives.
But perhaps my range isn't lateral enough. If someone could enlighten me on the effects of the Bible to the world that would be grand. In particular, its effects on one nation and how that nation interacts with its neighbors.
You're kidding, right? I thought you took some kind of world history class... Do the Crusades ring a bell? The Protestant Reformation? The Catholic/Counter Reformation? The entirety of the Roman/Byzantine empire? Those are just a few events in early Europe; there are countless more. Granted they're not all positive, but the point stands.
Once you examine the thread's structure in detail, you will understand it's not simply "HERR DERR GOD IS REAL" followed by "HERR DERR GOD IS FAKE" over and over.
Lol mostly. There are times when that pretty much sums it up.
xputnamehere wrote:Without it and other holy books, the world would be a much more violent place and deceitful place.
LOL
Forgetting logic again? Considering how many holy books have had positive effects, it's fair to assume the world could be worse off without them. If you try bringing up 9/11, I will laugh in your face.
Koran
-.-'
Last edited by Shift (Feb 24 2012 6:10:34 pm)
What? You don't believe me? Are you saying that the Bible doesn't teach morality as its highest standard? The entire concept of getting into heaven can only be accomplished by performing good deeds, and not bad ones.
This is what amused me. However, I doubt what you said is true anyway. I'm pretty sure I can do almost whatever I like and just repent before dying. Along with that, there's also a whole bunch of hate in there that you're meant to follow, too. It's certainly not all good or moral. The same probably applies to many other religions.
You could just leave people alone. I'm a very strong believer in Science, and am a very strong Atheist. However, my best friend is Christian, and so are most people in the west, so there is no point in trying to defy them. Believe me, I've tried. There is no definite proof of anything, until the invention of the time machine. Also, all laws,rules and guidelines have an exception ( the exception to that rule is itself), so quantum mechanics are just the newly discovered exceptions, so you can't say that Christianity has a stronger argument for that.
P.S. if I have offended anyone, I'm sorry. I'm simply making a point.
xputnameherex wrote:What? You don't believe me? Are you saying that the Bible doesn't teach morality as its highest standard? The entire concept of getting into heaven can only be accomplished by performing good deeds, and not bad ones.
This is what amused me. However, I doubt what you said is true anyway. I'm pretty sure I can do almost whatever I like and just repent before dying. Along with that, there's also a whole bunch of hate in there that you're meant to follow, too. It's certainly not all good or moral. The same probably applies to many other religions.
That is a much more respectable answer (Holy Wars). However, that was a very long time ago.
And yes, you could repent right before you die, but you would have to actually mean it. Just saying "Sorry" like when you have to apologize to someone as a child is not enough.
[ Started around 1738735156.7174 - Generated in 0.139 seconds, 12 queries executed - Memory usage: 1.82 MiB (Peak: 2.1 MiB) ]